Author
Topic: hero? maybe, but..... (Read 18508 times)

Would it bother you if every letter you received was previously opened?

that was done during WW2 to many people. there is currently a debate about whether or not electronic mail should have the same protections. most of us would hope so, but because it is going through servers and is not strictly private, there is a question of expectation of privacy. i think most people have an expectation of privacy if only because they don't really understand how this computer stuff works.

Quote

After the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, far-reaching programs to gather Internet and telephone content and metadata were launched under presidential authority, without congressional action or approval from the surveillance court.

The report, meanwhile, said that 97 percent of the wiretaps issued last year were for “portable devices” such as mobile phones and pagers. About 87 percent of the wiretaps were issued in drug-related cases, the report said. Other equipment tapped included computers, phone land lines, fax machines and, among other things, microphones.

the real importance of that is to reaffirm what i have pointed out before. that is: most of what was allowed to broader law enforcement by the patriot act was already available to the DEA long before. you may make the argument that the DEA should not have had such broad powers, but no one did and no one was very upset to have the government going after drug dealers. now you want to complain that they use the same tactics on a broader scale?

our government has to much power. in addition, the admin has gone way beyond even what the congress envisioned with the patriot act. this did not happen in a vacuum and did not start with 9/11. to bad people didn't get so upset when the DEA was confiscating property without a conviction, or doing all those nasty FISA approved spying things in years past. no one was. no one cared until their precious emails were looked at. now you think the solution is to have everyone and their brother spew out every little thing they know about our government, military, and abilities? the only thing that is going to do is cause this overstuffed government to crack down even more.

you want change get out there and get rid of the McCains, Grahams, and the rest of those idiots who sold us out. let a few people starve until they figure out that the government is not their parent. we can't have sensible laws of sensible security when we have statists in office and anarchists deciding which laws are valid and which are not.

since you like ben franklin:

He that would live in peace and at ease must not speak all he knows or all he sees.Benjamin Franklin

the quote often used to say we don't need security if we are inconvenienced by the state, is rarely properly copied. it is: “Those who would give up Essential Liberty, to purchase a little Temporary safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety"

Essential Libertay as understood by the founders is the first 10 amendments, or the Bill of Rights.

Logged

.....The greatest changes occur in their country without their cooperation. They are not even aware of precisely what has taken place. They suspect it; they have heard of the event by chance. More than that, they are unconcerned with the fortunes of their village, the safety of their streets, the fate of their church and its vestry. They think that such things have nothing to do with them, that they belong to a powerful stranger called “the government.” They enjoy these goods as tenants, without a sense of ownership, and never give a thought to how they might be improved.....

Would it bother you if every letter you received was previously opened?

that was done during WW2 to many people.

Excuse me kathyp but this remark is like comparing apples to pomegranates.

Yes the home bound mail of most men and women serving overseas was routinely opened and read. No, the purpose of this was not to spy on American GIs but to keep any information of a non personal nature from being sent home.

1st. There was a large propaganda effort on our part as well as the Axis powers and it was important that nothing of a defeatist nature was written.

2nd. Anything of a military nature that could help the Axis was verboten. If it got picked up by a stateside reporter and was printed or broadcast then the information could get back to our enemy. There also was the danger that a ship could be torpedoed, bombed, or hit a mine and mail could be captured by the enemy and then read for information. The same danger existed with for aircraft lost returning across the ocean with mail on board.

3rd. Everyone knew the mail was read. It was not done to spy, nor to insure loyalty but for the purpose of censorship.

4th. Every letter that was censored was signed by the officer who censored it.

5th. There was a declared... no there was two decl.... no there was three declared wars ongoing at the same time, one with Japan, another with Italy, and a third with Germany.

There was a declared... no there was two decl.... no there was three declared wars ongoing at the same time, one with Japan, another with Italy, and a third with Germany.

i understand that there is a debate about this, but congress did authorize these actions, so i'm not sure how a declaration of war, or not, makes it less valid.

Logged

.....The greatest changes occur in their country without their cooperation. They are not even aware of precisely what has taken place. They suspect it; they have heard of the event by chance. More than that, they are unconcerned with the fortunes of their village, the safety of their streets, the fate of their church and its vestry. They think that such things have nothing to do with them, that they belong to a powerful stranger called “the government.” They enjoy these goods as tenants, without a sense of ownership, and never give a thought to how they might be improved.....

The only thing that validates WWII Government censorship was its openness, plus the declarations of war, plus the fact that censorship was temporary, that made a big difference, it wasn't a secret ongoing electronic speed trap or a red light running cash flow scam like so much of what the government does to help you today. WWII censorship was involved with protecting military secrets and not with hindering free speech.

I wish to remind you that the Atomic bomb spies turned lighting rod Julius Rosenberg and his wife Ethel managed to transmit the A-Bomb secrets to the USSR despite the government opening American's mail right in the middle of WWII.

The man who actually stole the A-Bomb secrets was one Harvey Greenglass. Greenglass was Ethel Rosenberg's brother but the little leftist weasel turned in his own flesh and blood to save his own hide. To be fair to Greenglass he only pilfered the A-Bomb plans, it was his International Socialist sister Ethel and her husband Julius Rosenberg who influenced him to steal the A-Bomb plans and it was both of the Rosenbergs who transmitted them to the Soviet Union. As part of his plea deal Greenglass went as free as a Scotsman. He even gave a TV interview years later in which he defended his actions by saying, "What did you expect me to do, die for my beliefs?" That is what liberalism is all about, selfish self interest above ethics.

Look at the crowd the Communist and their leftist fellow travelers (like some I could mention on this forum) turned out in New York City in the early 1950s (at the height of McCarthyism no less) in a failed attempt to influence public opinion to find the Rosenbergs not guilty. Be afraid people, be very, very afraid.http://www.nbcuniversalarchives.com/nbcuni/clip/5110152AA1455_008.do

.....The greatest changes occur in their country without their cooperation. They are not even aware of precisely what has taken place. They suspect it; they have heard of the event by chance. More than that, they are unconcerned with the fortunes of their village, the safety of their streets, the fate of their church and its vestry. They think that such things have nothing to do with them, that they belong to a powerful stranger called “the government.” They enjoy these goods as tenants, without a sense of ownership, and never give a thought to how they might be improved.....

He’s obviously getting his apples confused with his pomegranates. :laugh:

Kingbee, I do find your logic kind of humorous.

It sounded like you said, ‘censorship is fine as long as it is open’. I’m sure the folks in China, Russia, and your other communist hotspots will be happy to know you approve of the way they do business.

As for the protesters in New York, maybe those dreaded “leftists” as you call them, just wanted to make sure the Government was telling the truth about the Rosenbergs. Believe it or not, sometimes the US government lies to the people. :shock:

...it wasn't a secret ongoing electronic speed trap or a red light running cash flow scam like so much of what the government does to help you today.

kingbee,I have no desire to delve back into the broader points of this argument, I've said what I believe and think kathy has done an outstanding job of trying to emphasize her point of view at least a half dozen different ways, although they continually appear to fall on deaf ears. :-D

However, your "red light running cash flow scam" comment did catch my attention. Are you really super paranoid, anti government, and anti technology enough that you have an issue with a red light camera?

While accepting the simple fact that NOTHING in life is perfect and there have been many claims, possibly even a few valid ones, such as the length of caution being reduced, etc.... Overall I can't think of a more evenly applied, fair, non disputable fact and evidence based way of issuing a red light ticket.

Yet all the apologist and excuse makers will come up with a 101 excuses as to why they are a bad idea...they're about money, it's big brother, they cause more rear end accidents because of people "stopping" for red lights, etc. ANYTHING to avoid self responsibility!

How about this concept....they catch people that violate the law, provide indisputable evidence, and hold them accountable by subjecting them to a fine. Imagine that, WHAT A NOVEL CONCEPT!

Or, are you really extreme enough to believe that not being allowed to run a red light somehow infringes on your personal liberties and somehow it's none of the governments business. :? If you don't want it to be a cash cow for the government....It's pretty simple, don't run the red light!

As someone who gets frustrated on a daily basis by watching my light turn green, then having to sit and possibly miss the green cycle waiting for 1, 2 or even 3 vehicles with the red light to finish clearing the intersection...Personally, I welcome the technology!

« Last Edit: July 02, 2013, 01:05:17 PM by Moots »

Logged

"We must reject the idea that every time a law’s broken, society is guilty rather than the lawbreaker. It is time to restore the American precept that each individual is accountable for his actions." - Ronald Reagan

I don'ty believe in WW2 they kept and stored all of your communications. They are storing enough data about you with every person you may have had any contacy with, what that conversation was about and able to sort out each individuals politaical and personal preferences. Each and every one of us that has had any kind of electronic communication. It's not if it happens. It is already being stored to be use3d against you if the need arises. Gun registartion will be a small pimple on the skin of this monster. Speaking out against the government most likely puts a special tag on your data. BEWARE!! He did not tip the terrorists off to anything they most likely did not already know and take means to offset. All the American people are now suspects in this "war' on terror. My point is government control without the consent of the governed is dangerous. regardless of which "party" is doing it. And the billions they are spending, more likely trillions, to treat American citizens as terror suspects is outrageous.Prism has very little to do with catching terrorists, it is about absolute power over the American people.

This operation is run by a secret court. accountable to nobody. And they gave themselves the power to grant " special exception " to the Constitution. http://www.breitbart.com/InstaBlog/2013/07/07/Sources-Secret-Court-Expands-NSA-Surveillance-Powers I guess it's ok to want to reel in the IRS, EPA ,DOE, FHA, HUD, but hey these guys have the best of intentions. We need to defund, yes defund,not defend these agencies. Don't think for a minute that the data gathered through this ever intensive spy program won't be shared with the other agencies to keep us in compliance. If you think otherwise, they have you right where they want you.Hitlers dreams would have came true with this program. Remember the key to winning any battle is information. When the Americam public becomes the battlefield,which it slowly is,guess whos holding the vast wealth of information on each and every citizen? Rest well with these thoughts.

My point is government control without the consent of the governed is dangerous. regardless of which "party" is doing it. And the billions they are spending, more likely trillions, to treat American citizens as terror suspects is outrageous.

no argument from me on this.

Quote

Remember the key to winning any battle is information

that, and the ability to keep secrets. "loose lips sink ships" and all that....

Quote

I don't believe in WW2 they kept and stored all of your communications.

considering all the extra-consitutional goings on under FDR, you can be they would have if they could have.

Logged

.....The greatest changes occur in their country without their cooperation. They are not even aware of precisely what has taken place. They suspect it; they have heard of the event by chance. More than that, they are unconcerned with the fortunes of their village, the safety of their streets, the fate of their church and its vestry. They think that such things have nothing to do with them, that they belong to a powerful stranger called “the government.” They enjoy these goods as tenants, without a sense of ownership, and never give a thought to how they might be improved.....

With the information the government is collecting on every citizen, the very beginning of any revolt against this tyrannical government is crushed. Even if we could start a revolt, Imagine, your on a hillside. You pick up your cell to communicate and receive a missile to the forehead.

perhaps, but other 21st century countries with more repressive governments than ours have managed it. besides, you can do it if you disguise your effort as "progressive" and go occupy some parks. :evil:

the biggest impediments to our future and our freedom, are apathy and ignorance. the worst culprits are those who should know better. it's not about guys like Obama or Reid. we know what they are. they don't even hide it. it's those like McCain and Graham who pretend to be on the side of the country and constitution, but are not. we are so stupid that we keep putting those types back in office. they do more damage than the loony leftists.

in the average congressional election we will return 90% of the current occupants to Washington. Can anyone honestly tell me that 90% of them deserve to be there, or to be returned? we to lazy to support new blood, or to lazy to do our homework....or to lazy even to vote.

Logged

.....The greatest changes occur in their country without their cooperation. They are not even aware of precisely what has taken place. They suspect it; they have heard of the event by chance. More than that, they are unconcerned with the fortunes of their village, the safety of their streets, the fate of their church and its vestry. They think that such things have nothing to do with them, that they belong to a powerful stranger called “the government.” They enjoy these goods as tenants, without a sense of ownership, and never give a thought to how they might be improved.....

Insurgencies against a superpower military like ours never work. That's why we won so quickly in Vietnam. Wait, that's a bad example. But there's Iraq. Wait, wait. Lebanon? Somalia? Afghanistan? I'm gonna have to think about this and get back to you.

Seriously, why do you think our leaders are so desperate to disarm the citizenry? Sooner or later, tankers have to come out of their tanks and drone operators have to come out of their bunkers. They live among us, and they have homes and families among us. The politicians who give them their orders live among us with homes and families among us.

Our military overwhelmingly despises our current administration. Many of them would disobey unlawful orders. And after ten years of constant war, we have millions of veterans who feel the same way, and who know how to use the most popular rifle in America, the civilian version of the M16. AR-15's are being sold as fast as they can be made, and people aren't buying them so that they can turn them in. The militia has never been better armed or better trained.

perhaps, but other 21st century countries with more repressive governments than ours have managed it. besides, you can do it if you disguise your effort as "progressive" and go occupy some parks. :evil:

the biggest impediments to our future and our freedom, are apathy and ignorance. the worst culprits are those who should know better. it's not about guys like Obama or Reid. we know what they are. they don't even hide it. it's those like McCain and Graham who pretend to be on the side of the country and constitution, but are not. we are so stupid that we keep putting those types back in office. they do more damage than the loony leftists.

in the average congressional election we will return 90% of the current occupants to Washington. Can anyone honestly tell me that 90% of them deserve to be there, or to be returned? we to lazy to support new blood, or to lazy to do our homework....or to lazy even to vote.

Right! Which brings us back to "Leftist Lite". When I saw Ryan and Rubio comment on the senate immigration bill, I wanted to throw up! The republicans are more dangerous to the constitution. Far from conservative. Ultra Leftist enablers.

Insurgencies against a superpower military like ours never work. That's why we won so quickly in Vietnam. Wait, that's a bad example. But there's Iraq. Wait, wait. Lebanon? Somalia? Afghanistan? I'm gonna have to think about this and get back to you

you have to be willing to actually kill people and break things to win. we have not been willing to do that since ww2.

Quote

Our military overwhelmingly despises our current administration. Many of them would disobey unlawful orders. And after ten years of constant war, we have millions of veterans who feel the same way, and who know how to use the most popular rifle in America, the civilian version of the M16. AR-15's are being sold as fast as they can be made, and people aren't buying them so that they can turn them in. The militia has never been better armed or better trained.

but have you noticed how the leadership is being replaced? one more decade and we won't have a military that remembers that it's the constitution they are supposed to defend.

Logged

.....The greatest changes occur in their country without their cooperation. They are not even aware of precisely what has taken place. They suspect it; they have heard of the event by chance. More than that, they are unconcerned with the fortunes of their village, the safety of their streets, the fate of their church and its vestry. They think that such things have nothing to do with them, that they belong to a powerful stranger called “the government.” They enjoy these goods as tenants, without a sense of ownership, and never give a thought to how they might be improved.....

As I layed awake listening to a Security Now podcast with Steve Gibson and Leo laport i had a revelation.Do any of you remeber the Florida couple that mysteriously was able to capture and record a cell phone call that Newt Gingrich made while driving on the highway? http://articles.philly.com/1997-04-24/news/25530818_1_gingrich-investigation-ethics-probe-cellular-phone It was talked about then of what it would take to intercept this call on both sides as the call went from cell to cell. The Clintons were notorious for keeping "databases". I can only think looking back that perhaps the DNC was already "datamining" the intelligence gathered by the NSA. I am betting someone paid this couple to take the fall for recording this conversation. 10 thousand dollars was a small fee to bring down Newt.So any one doubting that all this data collected unconstitutionally will not or would not be used for political purposes had better think again.

These guys are tech guys not political ax grinders. If you would like to listen and understand the ramifications of what is going on,start with the episodes in early July.https://www.grc.com/securitynow.htm

that was always hinky. some old couple just happened to have the knowledge and tech to do that and just happened to get that phone call? it takes a pretty wild leap to believe the story as it was told.

Logged

.....The greatest changes occur in their country without their cooperation. They are not even aware of precisely what has taken place. They suspect it; they have heard of the event by chance. More than that, they are unconcerned with the fortunes of their village, the safety of their streets, the fate of their church and its vestry. They think that such things have nothing to do with them, that they belong to a powerful stranger called “the government.” They enjoy these goods as tenants, without a sense of ownership, and never give a thought to how they might be improved.....

That statement doesn't get near the credit it deserves. "official stories" rarely match real events.

Logged

Quite difficult matters can be explained even to a slow-witted man, if only he has not already adopted a wrong opinion about them; but the simplest things cannot be made clear even to a very intelligent man if he is firmly persuaded that he already knows, and knows indubitably, the truth of the matter under consideration. -Leo Tolstoy

"Listen to the mustn'ts, child. Listen to the don'ts. Listen to the shouldn'ts, the impossibles, the won'ts. Listen to the never haves, then listen close to me . . . Anything can happen, child. Anything can be"